Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

NLP model of a LiBreH2O absorption refrigeration system for the minimization of

the annual operating cost
Carlos Rubio-Maya a, *, J. Jess Pacheco-Ibarra a, Juan M. Belman-Flores b, Sergio R. Galvn-Gonzlez a,
Crisanto Mendoza-Covarrubias a
a
b

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Edif. W, CU, UMSHN. Morelia, Michoacn, Mexico, CP 58030, Mexico
Department of Multidisciplinary Studies, Engineering Division, Campus Irapuato-Salamanca, University of Guanajuato, Yuriria, Gto., Mexico

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 8 September 2011
Accepted 20 December 2011
Available online 28 December 2011

In this paper the optimization of a LiBreH2O absorption refrigeration system with the annual operating
cost as the objective function to be minimized is presented. The optimization problem is established as
a Non-Linear Programming (NLP) model allowing a formulation of the problem in a simple and structured way, and reducing the typical complexity of the thermal systems. The model is composed of three
main parts: the thermodynamic model based on the exergy concept including also the proper formulation for the thermodynamic properties of the LiBreH2O mixture, the second is the economic model and
the third part composed by inequality constraints. The solution of the model is obtained using the
CONOPT solver suitable for NLP problems (code is available on request1). The results show the values of
the decision variables that minimize the annual cost under the set of assumptions considered in the
model and agree well with those reported in other works using different optimization approaches.

2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Absorption refrigeration
Optimization
NLP
Exergy
Cost analysis
LiBreH2O

1. Introduction
Absorption refrigeration systems (ARS) are gaining more
popularity in different cooling and refrigerating applications, due to
the use of refrigerants with almost zero global warming potential
and zero contribution to the ozone layer depletion. The ARS can use
several low-temperature heat sources as energy input in order to
produce the cooling effect, while conventional systems, i.e.
compression systems, utilize mechanical energy for its operation.
The heat sources to drive the ARS are wide and include fossil fuel,
renewable energy sources and waste heat recovered from prime
movers (cogeneration units) or industrial processes, being the
latter source the most cost-effective option when they are integrated in multi-product systems from the well-known cogeneration to more complex systems of combined production of several
types of energy carriers [1e3]. Nevertheless, ARS have two major
drawbacks compared with compression systems, lower efciency
and higher costs. Therefore, it is necessary to improve its design
and operation from several points of view in order to overcome
those drawbacks. So far, several methodologies have been proposed
to accomplish the challenge of improving ARS and they can be

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 52 4433223500x1160; fax: 52 4433223500x3103.

E-mail address: rmaya@umich.mx (C. Rubio-Maya).
1
Code available on request from corresponding author.
1359-4311/$ e see front matter
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.12.035

grouped mainly in second law thermodynamic analysis and thermoeconomic optimization. However, other works can be found in
the literature, in which improvements to the system are made
through the examination of the inuence of some parameters
under different operating conditions [4e8].
The principle of the second law is a powerful tool because it gives
information on how, where and how much the system performance
is degraded. Second law analysis can be based on the concepts of
entropy generation and exergy destruction. When the entropy
concept is used it is possible to identify the components or devices
of a thermal system with higher entropy generation, afterwards
improvements to the system are achieved minimizing the total
entropy generation. The exergy concept can be utilized in a similar
way, determining the exergy destruction of each component and
the total exergy destruction of the system. In this case, in order to
increase the efciency of the system the exergy destruction must be
minimized. Among the second law analysis, Kaynakli and Yamankaradeniz [9] studied the performance of lithium bromideewater
ARS varying some design parameters through a computational
model to determine the entropy generation of individual components and the total entropy generation. Sencan [10] used a simulation program to determine the Coefcient of Performance (COP) and
exergetic efciency of a single effect LiBreH2O ARS nding the
operating conditions that increase the above-mentioned performance indicators. Exergy analysis can be performed in a more
advanced fashion, as it is demonstrated by Morosuk and Tsatsaronis

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

Nomenclature
aC
A
bC
B_
B_ D
b
Cp
CT
CkC
3
CIN
COP
E_
h
iR
LMTD
_
m
Ny
P
Q_
s
top
T

capital recovery factor (dimensionless)

heat transfer area (m2)
annual cost not affected by optimization ($/year)
exergy ow (kW)
exergy destruction (kW)
specic exergy (kJ/kg)
specic heat capacity (kJ/kgK)
annual cost ($/year)
capital cost of the k-st element of the ARS ($)
unit cost of input exergy ($/kJ)
coefcient of performance or energy efciency ratio
energy (kW)
specic enthalpy (kJ/kg)
interest rate (%)
logarithmic mean temperature (K)
mass ow rate (kg/s)
period of repayment (years)
pressure (kPa)
heat ow (kW)
specic entropy (kJ/kg K)
period of operation per year (hours)
temperature ( C, K)

[11], which consist of splitting the exergy destruction within the

components of an ARS and then identifying the potential for
improving each systems component. Kaushik and Arora [12]
carried out the energy and exergy analysis of a single effect and
series ow double effect LiBreH2O ARS developing a computational
model for the parametric investigation of such systems.
The thermoeconomic analysis, also called exergoeconomics, is an
approach that allows improvements to the performance of thermal
systems by combining the second law and economic considerations.
Specically, thermoeconomics merges both the exergy concept and
economic analysis into a single framework, which purpose is to
achieve a balance between an/the expenditure on capital cost and the
fuel costs that will result in the minimum cost of the plant product.
Cost allocation, cost optimization, and cost analysis are the key
features of this discipline. Regarding optimization, thermoeconomics
has provided an alternative tool to the improvements of thermal
systems, mainly when traditionally optimization techniques are too
complex and time consuming for such systems. Also, refrigeration
systems, including ARS, have been optimized using the thermoeconomic approach [13e19], arguing that the reason for using such
approach is that the optimization of thermal systems cannot always
be carried out using sophisticated mathematical or numerical techniques, due to incomplete models, plant complexities, and strong
non-linear nature. The annual operating cost [13,14], the cost per
exergy unit of the product (i.e. cooling effect) [15e17], and the overall
economic cost of the nal product have been the objective functions
employed to optimize refrigeration systems, [18,19].
On the other hand, an alternative approach that has been
applied to the optimization of process industries is the one based
on mathematical programming that can be solved by means of
standard techniques such as lineal (LP), non-linear (NLP), mixedinteger linear (MILP) and mixed-integer non-linear programming
(MINLP). These strategies have been extensively used in the optimization of chemical processes but their application to the optimization of refrigeration systems is limited and only few research
projects can be found. Such is the case of Chvez-Islas et al. [20,21]
who reported the optimization of an NH3eH2O ARS by the application of MINLP. Recently, Gebreslassie et al. [22], presented a bi-

U
_
W
X
Z

11

overall heat transfer coefcient (kW/m2 K)

work (kW)
concentration of LiBr in the solution (%)
capital cost of k-st subsystem ($)

Greek symbols
3
effectiveness
Subscripts
a
coefcient
ABS
absorber
ci
cold inlet
co
cold outlet
CON
condenser
CV
control volume
EQS
element or subsystem
EVP
evaporator
GEN
generator
hi
hot inlet
ho
hot outlet
i
i-st stream
k
k-st element
SHX
solution heat exchanger
0
reference state or value

criteria NLP optimization of a NH3eH2O ARS minimizing the cost

and the environmental impact. In the same way Gebreslassie et al.
[23], presented a stochastic bi-criteria NLP optimization for the
minimization of total cost and the nancial risk associated with the
investment for the same system.
Therefore, based on the above ideas, the objective of the present
work is to address the optimization of single effect LiBreH2O ARS
using the approach based on mathematical programming, establishing a Non-linear Programming model using the exergy concept
(not included in the above works cited), through the annual operating cost as the objective function to be minimized. The NLP model
proposed is simple and structured and is favorable to reduce the
typical complexity of thermal systems, providing an alternative
approach to optimize ARS.

2. Single effect LiBreH2O ARS

2.1. System description
Compared to a compression cooling cycle, the basic idea of an
absorption system is to replace the electricity consumption associated with the vapor compression by a thermally driven system,
usually known as thermo-chemical compressor. This is accomplished by making use of absorption and desorption process that
employs a suitable working pair (refrigerant and absorbent), [24].
Fig. 1 shows the single effect LiBreH2O absorption cycle in a pressureetemperature diagram. The system provides chilled water
(QEVP) for cooling applications and could be activated using available heat from different sources. The basic components are the
absorber (ABS), condenser (CON), generator (GEN) and evaporator
(EVP), solution heat exchanger (SHX), refrigerant expansion valve
(REV), solution expansion valve (SEV) and solution pump (SP). It
can be seen in Fig. 1, when the refrigerant in vapor state comes from
the evaporator it is absorbed in a liquid forming a weak solution.
The liquid is pumped to a higher pressure, where the refrigerant is
separated from the solution by the addition of heat and then the
refrigerant is directed to the condenser. Finally, the liquid

12

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a single-effect LiBreH2O ARS.

containing less refrigerant (strong solution) is send back to the

absorber [10].
2.2. Thermodynamic modeling and assumptions
A thermodynamic analysis must be performed in order to obtain
every thermodynamic state in the ARS and involves the application
of mass balance (Equation (1)) as well as the rst law of thermodynamics (Equation (2)) to relate mass ows, enthalpies, heat
transfer and power.

dmCV

dt

_ 
m

IN

_
m

(1)

OUT

X
X
dECV
_
_ 
_
mh
mh
Q_ CV  W
CV
dt
IN
OUT

(2)

On the other hand, and exergy analysis is performed using the

Exergy balance applied to each component using:



X
X
dBCV
T
_
_ 
_  B_ D
mb
mb
Q_ CV 1  0  W
CV
dt
T
IN
OUT

(3)

Not considering chemical exergy, the exergy of a stream can be

determined according to the following expression:

b h  h0  T0 s  s0

(4)

Heat exchangers can be modeled using the logarithmic mean

temperature difference, the heat transfer area, and the overall heat
transfer coefcient with:

Q_ U,A,LMTD

(5)

The logarithmic mean temperature, which is calculated as

a function of the hot and cold end temperature differences:

LMTD

DT2  DT1
DT
ln 2
DT1

(6)

For the purpose of analysis, the following set of typical

assumptions is considered [9,10,12e16]:

 Steady state operation

 Heat exchange between the system and surroundings, other
than the prescribed by heat transfer at the generator,
condenser, and absorber does not occur
 Cooling capacity is known Q_ EVP , used to produce chilled
water
 Heat source is low grade steam
 The solution and refrigerant valves are adiabatic
 LiBr solutions in the generator and the absorber are in equilibrium at their respective temperatures and pressures
 Refrigerant at the condenser and evaporator exits is in a saturated state
 Strong solution of refrigerant leaving the absorber and the
weak solution of refrigerant leaving the generator are saturated
 Work input to the solution pump is neglected
 Thermodynamic properties of non-equilibrium solutions are
the same as the equilibrium values at the state with the same
temperature and concentration
 Pressure losses in all the heat exchangers and the pipelines are
neglected
 The reference environment is dened with T0 25  C and
P0 101.3 kPa
 To avoid crystallization of the solution, the solution entering
the throttling valve has the temperature at least 8  C above
crystallization
 Temperature of generator, condenser, evaporator, and absorber
are uniform throughout the components
 The energy required for running the cooling tower and the
associated water pumps as well as cooling fans are not
considered in the analysis
2.3. Thermodynamic properties
Thermodynamic properties are an essential part in the thermodynamic analysis of LiBreH2O ARS. Properties of wateresteam and
those for lithium bromide solution are needed and a brief review of
literature shows several correlations [25e30]. However, in order to
implement a determined set of correlations to construct the optimization model, they have to satisfy a compromise between being
expressions in uncomplicated formulation and at the same time
expressions providing accuracy of results. Under this consideration,
the concentration for the lithium bromide solution can be calculated
from Lansing [25], enthalpy, heat capacity and entropy from the
correlations of Kaita [28]. In one hand, enthalpy of wateresteam can
be determined from the correlation of Lansing [25], in the other hand,
entropy from IAPWS formulation [30]. Finally, the pressure on the
system can be established with the equation provided by Sun [26].
2.4. Economic model
In order to nd the inuence of the technical parameters on the
economic performance of the ARS, it is necessary to perform an
economic analysis. As exposed earlier, the most appropriate approach
is to join a determined economic parameter with the information
given by the thermodynamic analysis, specically information from
the second law. For this purpose, the annual operating cost, the cost
per exergy unit and overall economic cost of the nal product are the
most appropriated [31,32]. In this work, the annual cost of plant
operation will be investigated, it can be expressed as:
3 _
BIN x aC
CT x topCIN

n
X

CkC bC

(7)

In the previous equation (Equation (7)), the rst term of the

right side represents the cost due to fuel supply of the system

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

13

evaluated by the exergy input to the plant (second law information). The second term is the annual repayment which is
necessary to payback the investment after a specied period,
whereas the third term represents the annual cost not affected
by the optimization. The recovery factor, aC, is determined
with:

aC

iR 1 iR Ny

(8)

1 iR Ny 1

2.5. Benchmark case

In order to validate the thermodynamic model, thermodynamic
properties and economic model proposed, the work of Misra [13]
has been taken to establish a benchmark case. For this purpose,
a computationally effective model of the ARS has been developed.
Subsequently, the model was coded and solved in MATLAB using
the set of input data shown in Table 1 and therefore determining
the values of the benchmark case. Fig. 2 shows the detailed diagram
for the ARS under study.
The values obtained with the computational code are shown in
Table 2 and Table 3. Firstly, Table 2 shows the thermodynamics
properties whereas Table 3 displays the annual cost of plant operation and other related parameters. The information provided in
both tables agrees well with the results of Misra [13]. Therefore, the
model proposed can be considered valid and it can be formulated as
a mathematical programming problem to form the ARS non-linear
programming model.

In general terms, a NLP model is composed by three elements:

objective function, equality constraints and inequality constrains.
Mathematically, it can be enunciated according to the following
expression [33]:

min f x s:t:
x

hx 0
gx  0
x<

(9)

3.1. Objective function (economic model)

3 _
BIN aC
min CT x topCIN

Zk

kEQS

ckEQSXfEVP; CON; GEN; ABS; SHXg

(10)

The investment cost is estimated through equation (11)

considering the solution heat exchanger, generator, absorber,
condenser and evaporator as simple heat exchangers. In the
equation (11) Z0 and A0 represent a reference value and are taken as
7900 $/kW and 100 m2, respectively [15,18].

The NLP model of the ARS can be related with each element of
(9) as follows: rst of all, objective function dened using an
economical parameter; the equality constrains are related with the
thermodynamic model and thermodynamic properties. Finally,

Symbol
Q_
EVP

T1
T2
T4
T5
T18
T12
T13
T14
T15
3

T0
P0
iR
Ny
top
E
CIN


Ak 0:6
A0
ckEQSXfEVP; CON; GEN; ABS; SHXg
Zk Z0

(11)

3.2. Equality constraints

Table 1
Set of input data corresponding to the benchmark case [13].

Evaporator cooling load [kW]

Generator temperature
Condenser temperature
Evaporator temperature
Absorber temperature
Generator heating steam temperature
Condenser cooling water outlet temperature
Evaporator chilled water inlet temperature
Evaporator chilled water outlet temperature
Absorber cooling water inlet temperature
Solution heat exchanger effectiveness
Reference temperature
Reference pressure
Interest rate
Period of repayment
Time of operation per year
Unit cost of input exergy

inequality constraints contain equations that allow the operation of

the ARS within safe limits. For the ARS these elements are described
in detail in the following subsections.

The objective function to be utilized is the total annual cost

which formulation is:

3. NLP model

Variable/parameter

Fig. 2. Flow diagram of the single-effect LiBreH2O refrigeration system under study.

Unit

Value

kW

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C
%

C
kPa
%
Years
Hours
$/kW h

201.29
80
35
5
35
100
33
20
12
27
60
25
101.3
15
10
5000
0.03785

The thermodynamic model, including the thermodynamic properties of the working pair can be seen as the equality constraints in the
NLP model. In rst place, the thermodynamic model will be exposed.
3.2.1. Thermodynamic model
The mass ow rates in the ARS can be obtained with equations
(12)e(14). Equation (12) determines the refrigerant ow rate. Both
the mass ow rate for the strong solution and the weak solution,
are determined with equations (13) and (14), respectively.

_ 4 h4  h2
Q_ k m
ck; k EVP

(12)

_ 8 X8  X5 m
_ 4 X5
m

(13)

_ 4 X8
_ 5 X8  X5 m
m

(14)

14

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

Table 2
Thermodynamic properties of the benchmark case (this work).
Stream

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Substance

Waterevapor
Water
Water
Waterevapor
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Waterevapor
Water

kg/s

kPa

kJ/kg

kJ/kg K

kW

0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.989
0.989
0.989
0.904
0.904
0.904
19.429
19.429
6.010
6.010
18.447
18.447
0.121
0.121

80.00
35.00
35.00
5.00
35.00
35.00
58.49
80.00
53.00
53.00
30.38
33.00
20.00
12.00
27.00
30.38
100.00
100.00

5.65
5.65
0.87
0.87
0.87
5.65
5.65
5.65
5.65
0.87
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
101.32
101.32

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
55.21
55.21
55.21
60.40
60.40
60.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

2650.73
146.62
146.62
2511.68
115.87
NC
162.93
230.54
179.06
179.06
127.28
138.25
83.82
50.32
113.13
127.28
2677.54
418.76

8.609
0.504
NC
9.016
0.223
NC
0.372
0.455
0.304
NC
0.441
0.477
0.296
0.182
0.394
0.441
7.364
1.305

7.519
0.068
NC
14.629
53.284
NC
56.022
89.764
83.873
NC
5.628
10.708
0.173
4.039
1.271
5.344
58.763
4.110

NC e Not calculated.

Based on the weak solution side, the effectiveness of the solution heat exchanger can be related with temperatures by using
equation (15):

T9 T1  3 SHX T1  T5

(15)

Based on the strong solution side and combining with equations

(13) and (14) the effectiveness can be stated as:

T7  T5 X8 Cp5

LMTDk

3 SHX X5 Cp8 T1

 T5

(16)

Heat balance of the condenser, absorber and generator give the

equality constraints for such devices, equations (17)e(19),
respectively.

DTk2  DTk1
DT 2
ln k1
DTk

(21)

ckEQSXfEVP; CON; GEN; ABS; SHXg

Where:

DT2k Tkhi  Tkco

DT1k Tkho  Tkci

(22)

ckEQSXfEVP; CON; GEN; ABS; SHXg

(17)

The mass ow of chilled water is related with refrigeration load

by means of equation (23) and must satisfy the constraint established with equation (12).

_ 4 h9 m
_ 8  h5 m
_5
Q_ k h4 m
ck; k ABS

(18)

_ 13 h13  h14
Q_ k m
ck; k EVP

_ 8 h1 m
_ 4  h7 m
_5
Q_ k h8 m
ck; k GEN

(19)

_ 4 h1  h2
Q_ k m
ck; k CON

The logarithmic mean temperature difference is used to

determine the heat transfer characteristics of each heat
exchanger. The value for the overall heat transfer coefcient is
taken in the range of 0.2e0.5 kW/m2 K, according to [14] and
[16]. Equations (20)e(22) are the set of equality constraints to
be satised.

Q_ k Uk Ak LMTDk
ckEQSXfEVP; CON; GEN; ABS; SHXg

(20)

(23)

The mass ow of cooling water in the condenser and the

absorber are determined by using equations (24) and (25), satisfying the equality constrains of equations (17) and (18),
respectively.

_ 11 h12  h11
Q_ k m
ck; k CON

(24)

_ 15 h16  h15
Q_ k m
ck; k ABS

(25)

Finally, the mass ow of steam that must be provided to the ARS

in order to activate the system is written with the following
equality constraint:

_ 17 h17  h18
Q_ k m
ck; k GEN

(26)

Table 3
Annual cost of plan operation and other parameters (this work).
Parameter

Symbol

Unit

Value

Coefcient of performance
Total irreversibility rate
System capital cost
Annual cost of plan operation

COP
BD,TOT
ZTOT
CT

adim
kW
$
$/year

0.7376
41.634
45,489
16,211

3.2.2. Thermodynamic properties

The pressures on the system are established and determined
with the equation proposed by Sun [26], using the temperatures of
the condenser and evaporator provided in the set of input data
(Table 1):

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18


Pi exp 9:48654
ci; i 2; 4

3892:7
42:6776  Ti


(27)

The concentration in the system, for the state 5 and 8, is

determined using the formulation given in Lansing [25]:

X5

49:04 1:125T5  T4
134:65 0:47T5

(28)

X8

49:04 1:125T1  T2
134:65 0:47T1

(29)

Enthalpies for states 1, 2 and 4 can be calculated following the

expressions provided by Lansing [25]. States 2 and 4 are considered
as saturated liquid and saturated vapor, respectively:

h1 104:753 2398:19904 1:925928T1  0:1800324T2

(30)
h2 104:753 4:1868T2  104:67

(31)

h4 104:753 2398:19904 1:7458956T4

(32)

15

hi 104:753 4:1868Ti  104:67

ci; i 0; 16 and 18

(38)

hi 104:753 2398:19904 1:7458956Ti

ci; i 17

(39)

The entropy of state 1 is calculated using the IAPWS formulation

for region 2 using part of the code developed by Holmgren [34]
through an equation with the form of equation (40). Further
details can be found in [30].


 

si p; s
s g0s grs  g0 gr
R
ci; i 1

(40)

Entropies for states 0, 2, 11 to 16 and 18 are determined with

a polynomial expression obtained using the software EES [35],
which is valid only for saturated liquid, equation (41). A similar
expression for states 4 and 17 that belong to saturated vapor is
obtained, equation (42). These expressions are valid only for the
typical range of temperatures of ARS.

si 0:00513126 0:0149286Ti  0:0000192598Ti2

ci; i 0; 2; 11  16; 18

(41)

The enthalpy of the LiBreH2O mixture is calculated using the

expressions proposed by Kaita [28]. With equation (33), the
enthalpy of state 5 is calculated and using equation (34) enthalpies
of states 8 and 9 are determined.

si 9:13788  0:0247901Ti  0:0000705193Ti2

ci; i 4; 17

(42)



hi a0 a1 X5 Ti 0:5b0 b1 X5 Ti2 d0 d1 X5 d2 X52 d3 X53

The entropy of the LiBreH2O mixture is calculated using the

expressions proposed by Kaita [28], for the states 5, 7, 8 and 9.
Values for constants Bjk are given in Table 4.

ci;i 5
hi

(33)

a0 a1 X8 Ti 0:5b0 b1 X8 Ti2

d0 d1 X8 d2 X82 d3 X83

ci;i 8;9

(34)

Thermal capacity of the weak and strong solution is determined

with:

Cp5 a0 a1 X5 b0 b1 X5 T5

(35)

Cp8 a0 a1 X8 b0 b1 X8 T1

(36)

In equations (33)e(36) the values for the constants are:

a0 3.462023, a1 2.679895  102, b0 1.3499  103,
b1 6.55  106, d0 162.81, d1 6.0418, d2 4.5348  103,
d3 1.2053  103.
The energy balance applied to the solution heat exchanger,
considering that the enthalpy of state 6 has the same value of state
5 (since the pump work is negligible), gives the equality constraint
to be satised and related the enthalpy of state 7:

_ 5 h7  h5 m
_ 8 h8  h9
m

(37)

Enthalpies for reference state as well as states 11 to 19 are obtained from the expressions of Lansing [25], equations (38) and (39):

si

3
3
P
P
j0 k0

Bjk X k T j

(43)

ci; i 5 and 7; 9
Once enthalpies and entropies have been expressed as equality
constraints, the exergy of states 1 to 18 can be calculated by using
equation (4). Additionally, exergy destroyed in each component can
be obtained with equation (3), resulting in the following set of
equality constraints:


 

B_ D;EVP B_ 2 B_ 13  B_ 4 B_ 14

(44)


 

B_ D;CON B_ 1 B_ 11  B_ 2 B_ 12

(45)


 

B_ D;GEN B_ 17 B_ 7  B_ 1 B_ 8 B_ 18

(46)


 

B_ D;ABS B_ 4 B_ 9 B_ 15  B_ 5 B_ 16

(47)


 

B_ D;SHX B_ 5 B_ 8  B_ 7 B_ 9

(48)

In the exergy balance of equations (47) and (48) the throttling

valve and the solution pump are included respectively. Finally, the

Table 4
Constants in the equation of entropy proposed by Kaita [28].
j

Bj0

0
1
2
3

5.127558
1.226780
1.364895
1.021501






101
102
105
108

Bj1

Bj2

Bj3

1.393954  102
9.156820  105
1.068904  107
0

2.924145  105
1.820453  108
1.381109  109
0

9.035697  107
7.991806  1010
1.529784  1011
0

16

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

exergy input to the system can be stated as equation (49) and must
satisfy the total annual cost established by the objective function of
the NLP model.

B_ IN



P_
BD;k B_ 13  B_ 14

ckEQSXfEVP; CON; GEN; ABS; SHXg

(49)

Inequality constraints represent design specications, such as

minimum and maximum equipment capacities and upper and
lower limits on design variables, the following equation (50) shows
this:

(50)

Also, inequality constraints are used in order to prevent negative

values of the variables. However, an important constraint is the one
that assures that temperature of solution, before entering the
throttling valve, does not reach the crystallization temperature:

T9  Tc X8  8

Variable

Symbol

Unit

Value
This work

3.3. Inequality constraints

lb  x  ub

Table 5
Comparison of optimal values of this work with [13].

(51)

Decision variables
Generator temperature
Condenser temperature
Evaporator temperature
Absorber temperature
Solution heat exchanger
effectiveness

Ref. [13]

C
C

C

C
%

84.8
39.8
8.6
35.5
70.7

88.8
34.8
8.8
31.0
NRa

Objective Function
Annual cost of plant operation

CT

$/year

14,993.9

15,146.0

Other parameters
System capital cost
Coefcient of performance
Total irreversibility rate
Evaporator heat ow rate
Generator heat ow rate
Condenser heat ow rate
Absorber heat ow rate
Generator heat transfer area
Condenser heat transfer area
Evaporator heat transfer area
Absorber heat transfer area
Solution HX heat transfer area

ZTOT
COP
BD,TOT
Q_ EVP
Q_ GEN
Q_ CON
Q_ ABS
AGEN
ACON
AEVP
AABS
ASHx

$
adim
kW
kW
kW
kW
kW
m2
m2
m2
m2
m2

41,718
0.7755
39.171
201.29
259.55
213.37
247.47
133.79
127.37
144.85
98.21
54.59

60,730
NR
22.38
201.29
NR
NR
NR
401.58
249.39
131.43
190.10
85.80

T1
T2
T4
T5

NR e Not reported.

4. Decision variables
Decision variables are those variables that maximize or
minimize the objective function. In this case, the decision variables are the temperature of generator, temperature of
condenser, temperature of evaporator, temperature of absorber
and effectiveness of solution heat exchanger. The appropriate set
of these variables will minimize the annual operating cost of the
LiBreH2O absorption refrigeration system under the assumptions
considered.
5. Results
The NLP model developed was implemented in the modeling
system GAMS interfacing with CONOPT as optimization package.
CONOPT solver is designed to manage NLP problems and
employs the sequential quadratic programming (SQP) method
that uses exact second derivatives to compute better search
directions in order to reach faster the solution, more details can
be found in [36]. The optimization problem has 115 equations
and 119 variables. It was solved in 0.031 s using a machine with
2 GB RAM and processor with 1.67 GHz. It is worth noting that
global optimality of the solution found cannot be guaranteed,
since CONOPT is a local optimizer. Thus, these solutions must be
regarded as locally optimum unless a global optimization
method is employed. However, we consider that a local solution
of the problem is valid for the purpose of the analysis performed because the results obtained do agree well with the
work being in comparison.
The optimal values of the ARS optimization model of this work
are shown in Table 5. This includes the results of the work of
Misra [13] who optimized the ARS using the thermoeconomical
approach. The decision variables are the temperature of the
generator, the condenser, the evaporator and the absorber
including the effectiveness of the solution heat exchanger. It can
be seen that the values are slightly different. For instance, the
temperature of the generator is 84.8. For this work the compared
value is 88.8  C. The condenser and absorber temperature is 5  C
and 4.5  C above, respectively. The evaporator remains almost
with a value of 8.6  C. In the Misras research [13] the value of the

solution heat exchanger effectiveness is not reported, but using

their own data in the MATLAB code developed in this work it
showed a value of 0.65. The set of values obtained here, leads us
to achieve a value of the objective function (the annual cost of
plant operation) with $14,993 (US dollars) per year, this amount
was decreased in about $150 per year compared with the value of
$15,146. This decreasing fact is directly related with the lower
investment cost of about $41,700 which was originated due to less
heat transfer area of ARS heat exchangers. It can be seen that heat
transfer areas are reduced signicantly. For instance, the heat
transfer area of the generator was reduced from 401 m2 to
133 m2. This variation is mainly due to the range of values utilized
for the overall heat transfer coefcient. From the point of view of
the optimization procedure, differences in values of the decision
variables is mainly attributable to the lower value achieved in the
objective function. In other words, the solver nds the set of
values that minimize the annual operating cost until reach
$14,993 upon the established assumptions. That is, the objective
function would not have achieved a lower value compared to the
base case, for the same values of the decision variables in both
cases.
Although the solution of the NLP model proposed found new
optimal values and the value of the objective function was
reduced, it can be seen that the exergy destruction was increased
considerably from 22.38 kW to 39.17 kW. In this case, the absorber
is responsible of 12.042 kW, the generator of 10.543 kW, in its
turn, the evaporator and the condenser with 8.204 kW and
5.519 kW, respectively (not shown in Table 5). From the thermodynamic point of view, this fact is not favorable because the
energy resources are not being used efciently. However, with the
model proposed through uni-objective optimization it is not
possible to assure the minimum values of the majority of
parameters involved.
Finally, Table 6 shows the thermodynamic properties of each
ow in the absorption refrigeration system for the optimum
case. The values in the table are obtained using the optimized
decision variables and the code developed in MATLAB; which
includes each property formulation for steam and LiBreH2O
mixture.

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

17

Table 6
Thermodynamic properties of the optimum case.
Stream

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Material ow

Waterevapor
Water
Water
Waterevapor
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
LiBreWater
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Waterevapor
Water

kg/s

kPa

kJ/kg

kJ/kg K

kW

0.086
0.086
0.086
0.086
0.745
0.745
0.745
0.659
0.659
0.659
19.451
19.451
6.010
6.010
17.488
17.488
0.115
0.115

84.86
39.85
39.85
8.67
35.51
35.51
64.32
84.86
49.97
49.97
30.38
33.00
20.00
12.00
27.00
30.38
100.00
100.00

7.35
7.35
1.12
1.12
1.12
7.35
7.35
7.35
7.35
1.12
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
101.32
101.32

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
53.07
53.07
53.07
59.96
59.96
59.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

2659.20
166.92
166.92
2518.09
108.18
NC
167.45
237.55
170.59
170.59
127.28
138.25
83.82
50.32
113.13
127.28
2677.54
418.76

8.513
0.569
NC
8.928
0.239
NC
0.426
0.485
0.289
NC
0.441
0.477
0.296
0.182
0.394
0.441
7.364
1.305

10.742
0.138
NC
11.933
30.735
NC
33.543
64.241
58.571
NC
5.635
10.720
0.173
4.039
1.204
5.066
55.893
3.909

6. Conclusions
In the present work it was addressed the optimization of single
effect LiBreH2O ARS using the approach based on mathematical
programming. We established a Non-linear Programming model,
using the exergy concept and dening the annual operating cost as
the objective function to be minimized. In order to validate the
model proposed a benchmark case, it was solved and coded with
simple formulations for the thermodynamic properties of water
and the LiBreH2O mixture. Then, the code was formulated as an
optimization model and the results were compared with a thermoeconomic method of optimization. The following conclusions
are stated:
 The optimization of single effect LiBreH2O ARS under the
approach based on mathematical programming and using the
exergy concept through the annual operating cost as the
objective function to be minimized is possible. Therefore, it can
be stated that the model proposed is simple and structured and
also it reduces the typical complexity of thermal systems
providing an alternative approach to optimize ARS.
 Modern codes to solve NLP problems allow addressing complex
optimization of thermal systems and the combination with
high performance computers reduces costs, both computational and economically.
 Exergy is a useful tool in design and optimization stages of ARS,
due to its ability to identify which subsystem is less efcient in
terms of exergy destroyed. The inuence of the most relevant
design variables can be also located.
 The availability of several formulations for the thermodynamic
properties allows implementing simple expressions to form
the equality constraints without losing accuracy.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the nancial support of this
research to the Mexican Ministry of Public Education under the
PROMEP program with projects reference PROMEP/103.5/10/7389.
References
[1] C. Rubio-Maya, J. Uche-Marcuello, A. Martnez-Gracia, A.A. Bayod-Rjula,
Design optimization of a polygeneration plant fuelled by natural gas and
renewable energy sources, Applied Energy 88 (2) (2011) 449e457.

[2] C. Rubio-Maya, Combined production of electricity, heat, cold and fresh water,
in a sustainable mode for the tourist sector, PhD thesis. Department of
Mechanical Engineering, University of Zaragoza 2009 [in Spanish].
[3] T.M. Mrz, Thermodynamic and economic performance of the LiBreH2O
single stage absorption water chiller, Applied Thermal Engineering 26
(17e18) (2006) 2103e2109.
[4] M. Mostafavi, B. Agnew, The effect of ambient temperature on the surface area
of components of an air-cooled lithium bromide/water absorption unit,
Applied Thermal Engineering 16 (4) (1996) 313e319.
[5] M. Mostafavi, B. Agnew, The impact of ambient temperature on lithiumbromide/water absorption machine performance, Applied Thermal Engineering 16 (6) (1996) 515e522.
[6] I.H. Malik, M. Altamush Siddiqui, Optimization of generator temperatures in
the heat operated absorption cycle using four types of aqueous salt solutions,
Energy Conversion and Management 37 (4) (1996) 433e445.
[7] M.A. Siddiqui, Economic analyses of absorption systems: part Aedesign and
cost evaluation, Energy Conversion and Management 38 (9) (1997) 889e904.
[8] M.A. Siddiqui, Economic analyses of absorption systems: part Beoptimization
of operating parameters, Energy Conversion and Management 38 (9) (1997)
905e918.
[9] O. Kaynakli, R. Yamankaradeniz, Thermodynamic analysis of absorption
refrigeration system based on entropy generation, Current Science 92 (4)
(2007) 472e479.
[10] A. Sencan, K.A. Yakut, S.A. Kalogirou, Exergy analysis of lithium bromide/
water absorption systems, Renewable Energy 30 (5) (2005) 645e657.
[11] T. Morosuk, G. Tsatsaronis, A new approach to the exergy analysis of
absorption refrigeration machines, Energy 33 (6) (2008) 890e907.
[12] S.C. Kaushik, A. Arora, Energy and exergy analysis of single effect and series
ow double effect waterelithium bromide absorption refrigeration systems,
International Journal of Refrigeration 32 (6) (2009) 1247e1258.
[13] R.D. Misra, P.K. Sahoo, A. Gupta, Thermoeconomic optimization of a LiBr/H2O
absorption chiller using structural method, Journal of Energy Resources
Technology 127 (2) (2005) 119e124.
[14] Kizilkan, A. Sencan, S.A. Kalogirou, Thermoeconomic optimization of a LiBr
absorption refrigeration system, Chemical Engineering and Processing:
Process Intensication 46 (12) (2007) 1376e1384.
[15] R.D. Misra, et al., Thermoeconomic optimization of a single effect water/LiBr
vapour absorption refrigeration system, International Journal of Refrigeration
26 (2) (2003) 158e169.
[16] R.D. Misra, P.K. Sahoo, A. Gupta, Thermoeconomic evaluation and optimization of a double-effect H2O/LiBr vapour-absorption refrigeration system,
International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (3) (2005) 331e343.
[17] R.D. Misra, P.K. Sahoo, A. Gupta, Thermoeconomic evaluation and optimization of an aqua-ammonia vapour-absorption refrigeration system, International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (1) (2006) 47e59.
[18] R.D. Misra, P.K. Sahoo, A. Gupta, Application of the exergetic cost theory to the
LiBr/H2O vapour absorption system, Energy 27 (11) (2002) 1009e1025.
[19] M.D. dAccadia, F.d. Rossi, Thermoeconomic optimization of a refrigeration
plant, International Journal of Refrigeration 21 (1) (1998) 42e54.
[20] L.M. Chvez-Islas, C.L. Heard, Optimization of a simple ammoniaewater absorption refrigeration cycle by application of mixed-integer nonlinear programming,
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 48 (4) (2009) 1957e1972.
[21] L.M. Chvez-Islas, C.L. Heard, I.E. Grossmann, Synthesis and optimization of an
ammoniaewater absorption refrigeration cycle considering different types of
heat exchangers by application of mixed-integer nonlinear programming,
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 48 (6) (2009) 2972e2990.

18

C. Rubio-Maya et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 37 (2012) 10e18

[22] B.H. Gebreslassie, G. Guilln-Goslbez, L. Jimnez, D. Boer, Design of environmentally conscious absorption cooling systems via multi-objective optimization and life cycle assessment, Applied Energy 86 (9) (2009) 1712e1722.
[23] B.H. Gebreslassie, G. Guilln-Goslbez, L. Jimnez, D. Boer, Economic performance optimization of an absorption cooling system under uncertainty,
Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (17e18) (2009) 3491e3500.
[24] P. Srikhirin, S. Aphornratana, S. Chungpaibulpatana, A review of absorption
refrigeration technologies, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 5
(2001) 343e372.
[25] F.L. Lansing, Computer modeling of a single-stage lithium bromide/water
absorption refrigeration unit, JPL Deep Space Network Progress Report, DSN
42e32 (1976) 247e257 [A pdf document on the internet].
[26] D.W. Sun, Thermodynamic design data and optimum design maps for
absorption refrigeration systems, Applied Thermal Engineering 17 (3) (1997)
211e221.
[27] H.T. Chua, H.K. Toh, A. Malek, K.C. Ng, K. Srinivasan, Improved thermodynamic
property elds of LiBreH2O solution, International Journal Refrigeration 23
(2000) 412e429.

[28] Y. Kaita, Thermodynamic properties of lithium bromideewater solutions at

high temperatures, International Journal Refrigeration 24 (2001) 374e390.
[29] A. Sencan, K.A. Yakut, S.A. Kalogirou, Thermodynamic analysis of absorption
systems using articial neural network, Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 29e43.
[30] W. Wagner, et al., The IAPWS industrial formulation 1997 for the thermodynamic properties of water and steam, Journal of Engineering for Gas
Turbines and Power 122 (1) (2000) 150e184.
[31] A. Bejan, G. Tsatsaronis, M.J. Moran, Thermal Design and Optimization, Wiley,
New York, 1996.
[32] T.J. Kotas, The Exergy Method of Thermal Plant Analysis, Butterworths, London, 1985.
[33] C.A. Floudas, Nonlinear and Mixed-integer Optimization: Fundamentals and
Applications, Oxford University Press, , New York, 1995, pp. 462.
[34] M. Holmgren, X Steam e Steam and Water Properties According to the IAPWS
IF-97 Standard (2008) Available from: http://www.x-eng.com/index.htm.
[35] S.A. Klein, Engineering Equation Solver, EES-Software.
[36] R.E. Rosenthal, GAMS e A Users Guide, GAMS, Washington, DC, USA, 2010,
Development Corporation.